Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!sunic!uupsi!nyser!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military From: bxr307@csc.anu.oz Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: HEAT shell question and proposal. Message-ID: <13092@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 12 Jan 90 04:47:27 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Organization: Computer Services, Australian National University Lines: 109 Approved: military@att.att.com From: bxr307@csc.anu.oz From: att!utzoo!henry >>From: bxr307@csc.anu.oz >> I am surprised that no one in the military is looking at the use of >>HESH (H.E. Squash Head or HEP to the US people out there) as a counter to >>reactive armour... >>... literally "blow off" the reactive armour boxes and leave large gaping >>holes in their covering of the main armour plate as well as severely disabling >>the vehicles crew (cuncussion), perhaps killing them (by the scabbing of >>secondary projectiles off the inner armour) and destroying or damaging most of >>the vehicles optical/optronic systems through the cuncussion... >HESH is not magic. I doubt that all these effects will be available at the >same time. Any explosion -- HESH, HEAT, whatever -- on the exterior of the >tank will get rid of some of the reactive armor. Whether the holes will be >big enough to exploit is a harder question. I'm a bit skeptical about the >concussion effects being so much greater; do remember that a HEAT warhead >has quite a bit of explosive in it. And the scabbing effect works well >only for single-plate armor, while most modern armor is multi-layer. I never claimed that HESH was magic. What I was discussing was the possible merits of the use of HESH against reactive armour. The British army has never abondoned HESH. In their MBT's HESH is the main secondary round loaded after APFSDS. HEAT is carried in far fewer numbers than HESH (HESH has a useful secondary use as a substitute HE round, whereas HEAT has not). As to the effect of multi-layer armour I would have thought that HEAT was just as badly affected by such things (wasn't CHOBHAM armour designed to defeat HEAT by using a multi-layer effect backed by ceramic to prevent the jet penetrating?) I would have thought though, that even with multi-layered armour that HESH's shockwave would still have been trasmitted through, whereas with HEAT the multiple layers would have prevented the plasma jet from penetrating as far. While HESH, would I am sure, remove the reactive armour boxes by blast effect HEAT would just detonate one or two of the surrounding boxes and be prevented from penetrating. In addition I'm sure that the blast from a HESH round going off right next to a vehicle's armour, while not actually penetrating would have useful side effects on the performance of the vehicles optics and crew (ie damage and disorientate them). Another possible solution which I have only just thought of, would be to fire multiple projectiles at the one target. The first being HESH to remove the reactive armour and the second following immediately after to strike the same spot to penetrate. The Germans built and trialled a few years ago a Leopard II hull mounting two 120mm guns in a casement hull with auto-loaders as a possible replacement for the Leopard II. The guns of such a vehicle could be computer controlled to fire with an intersecting line of sight on a target (the German vehicle had the guns mounted on the outside edges of the hull, if they were mounted along the central axis, either side-by-side or one above the other this problem would be solved more easily). This would allow two rounds to be fired on the one target with a high chance of the two rounds striking the one spot (or very close by). If ATGW were being used instead I'm sure the problem would be even more easily solved with a twin missile launcher which fires two missiles a few seconds apart and has the second automatically following the first (perhaps using IR guidance homing on a flare on the tail of the first, or even better yet just its exhaust plume). [mod.note: The next logical development of this, I submit, would be to have *both* rounds fired from the same weapon, so that one strikes just after the other in exactly the same spot. This is, in effect, what the new generation antitank missiles will do. They mount two charges, a small charge in the nose to detonate the reactive armor, and a larger, penetrating charge further back, which fires once the reactive armor has been removed. Presuming, naturally, that this scheme works... of which Germany and France, at least, seem convinced. - Bill ] While a kinetic energy round is, has been suggested by another contributor perhaps the best solution to the reactive armour problem such a solution is a difficult solution for small weapons like the infantry missile. Even in the tanks the development limits are being reached with regards to conventional guns. The NATO countries are looking at 140mm guns for future MBT's to defeat expected Warsaw Pact advances in armour technology. However this is starting to get to the practicable size limit of a round that can be loaded by hand in a single piece. This could mean the death of the loader in the tank crew (which has been on the cards for quite a while). However this is something that will most probably occur anyway with the demographic & economic problems being encountered in most Western societies. One possible alternative to the more exotic types of gun, like the liquid propellant weapons and rail guns is the hypervelocity gun. I know the Canadians towards the end of WWII were doing some interesting experiments with a 6 Lb (57mm) AT gun sleeved down to fire 2 Lb (40mm) projectiles (using a 6 Lb case & charge). I was wondering if anybody (apart from the Isrealis with their 60mm weapon) had followed this up in regards to main tank armament. Perhaps a 105mm round propelled by a 120mm sized charge would be more useful than a 140mm gun (with all its attendant penalties). This would create a hypervelocity gun at little expense and allow use of already established production lines for ammunition and gun mounts, etc. -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- "It won't be _that_ hot, surely?" Asked Mrs.Bloggs "Well, I don't know - they say the one at Hiroshima was equal to one thousand suns. So it is _quite_ hot and besides, The Powers That Be are making much better ones now. Science has leaped forward with giant strides." Declared Jim Bloggs quite happily as he prepared for the expected nuclear attack by whitewashing the windows. From "When the Wind Blows" by Raymond Biggs ----------------------------------------|-Snail Mail------------------------ E-Mail Addresses:- bxr307@coombs.anu.oz | Brian Ross | Sociology Dept.,R.S.S.S. bxr307@csc.anu.oz | Australian National University | CANBERRA,A.C.T.,2601, | AUSTRALIA | _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_